Its freaking ridiculous. After just 3 exibition games, i am tired of 3.0 already. I have the #1 rated team to start the season and playing 3 sim teams in exibition games. The score in those 3 games have been 105-42, 84-75, and 73-63. If this continues any longer, i will definately be done with this game. After all the time we've waited for the release of this new 3.0 engine, you think they would have had all these kinks worked out. Now we all have to waste our money paying for seasons as they use us as guinea pigs to further work out the kinks. I've really had enough of this crap!!!

If they were settling for FGs after every kick off, I'd certainly agree with that theory. But the completion pct's and TDs are just way too high imo. I'll get a better idea once all my new recruits are in the depth charts and real games start. But like i said earlier in this thread, i have play many exibition games throughout my time playing GD, and have never seen scores like this...let alone against long time sim schools.

I'll complain if you keep winning 54-27 mr_mojo lol. Its hard to even try to learn the new engine. You know they can't leave it this way and if they do it just isn't worth playing. Regretting the 5 pack I recently bought...

Hello guys. I know some of the scores seem a bit artificial at this time. There are still some score influencing modifications that I'm in the process of correcting. (example, there is a discrepancy in rushing numbers are inflated when attributes hit a certain difference. Also, QB are throwing at a high percentage completion based on the QB rating. I've been running various tests over the past few months, and I've honed in on a better model for how this is calculated. ) Besides that, the exhibitions scores do seem influenced by the punter/kicker issue as well. I'm also looking into creating a more realistic result from a backup kicker.

I got smoked 79-7 in my third exhibition game. However, its a new team I just picked up and its not very good and I played a top caliber opponent. Still......I don't recall getting spanked that bad even when I first started and didnt have a clue.

Posted by oriole_fan on 10/29/2013 5:31:00 PM (view original):Hello guys. I know some of the scores seem a bit artificial at this time. There are still some score influencing modifications that I'm in the process of correcting. (example, there is a discrepancy in rushing numbers are inflated when attributes hit a certain difference. Also, QB are throwing at a high percentage completion based on the QB rating. I've been running various tests over the past few months, and I've honed in on a better model for how this is calculated. ) Besides that, the exhibitions scores do seem influenced by the punter/kicker issue as well. I'm also looking into creating a more realistic result from a backup kicker.

Running numbers seem fine at the lower levels. Passing comp% is a little high at the lower levels, but nowhere near as out of whack as it appears at D1. My guess is that you are only looking at one set of numbers, rather than the relative differences in the offense and defense when determining outcomes. This is probably the reason why you see bigger discrepancies in D1 where the raw attributes are higher.

I would be careful adjusting outcomes universally since that will negate the relative differences in teams. This did not work before under jconte or norbert.

Posted by oriole_fan on 10/29/2013 5:31:00 PM (view original):Hello guys. I know some of the scores seem a bit artificial at this time. There are still some score influencing modifications that I'm in the process of correcting. (example, there is a discrepancy in rushing numbers are inflated when attributes hit a certain difference. Also, QB are throwing at a high percentage completion based on the QB rating. I've been running various tests over the past few months, and I've honed in on a better model for how this is calculated. ) Besides that, the exhibitions scores do seem influenced by the punter/kicker issue as well. I'm also looking into creating a more realistic result from a backup kicker.

Running numbers seem fine at the lower levels. Passing comp% is a little high at the lower levels, but nowhere near as out of whack as it appears at D1. My guess is that you are only looking at one set of numbers, rather than the relative differences in the offense and defense when determining outcomes. This is probably the reason why you see bigger discrepancies in D1 where the raw attributes are higher.

I would be careful adjusting outcomes universally since that will negate the relative differences in teams. This did not work before under jconte or norbert.

Seems like it would be best to convert the differences to percentage differences and adjust from that difference in player ratings. That way it would slide from DIII to D1A and the absolute difference can be greater at D1A but still be relatively similar in percentage. Just a thought . . . .